chapter i. Other recent books of special interest are: _Shakespeare_,

Walter Raleigh (1907, English Men of Letters Series); _William Shakespere_, Barrett Wendell (1894); _Shakespeare and his Predecessors_, F. S. Boas (1896). For a general surrey of the course of Shakespearean criticism, see Ward, vol. i, chap. iv; or Lounsbury, _Shakespeare as a Dramatic Artist_, and _Shakespeare and Voltaire_; or the bibliographical lists in the various volumes of Furness's Variorum edition. This edition, now in progress, and Malone's Variorum edition of 1821, are the most valuable in furnishing information. Nearly all recent editions of Shakespeare supply fairly adequate information in regard to critical conclusions on matters of date, sources, and text. Probably the most serviceable bibliography of Shakespearean editions and criticism up to 1870, and to a considerable extent for the Elizabethan drama, is to be found in the _Catalogue of the Barton Collection_ of the Boston Public Library (1888), accessible in most large libraries in this country. A complete Shakespearean bibliography since 1865 is supplied by the bibliographies published in the _Jahrbuch der Deutschen Shakespeare-Gesellschaft_. These also comprise nearly all monographs of importance dealing with the drama from 1557 to 1642.

The present chapter borrows from my article on Hamlet and the Revenge Plays (_Publ. Mod. Lang. Assn._ 1902), referred to in chap. iv. E. E. Stoll's _John Webster_ (Cambridge, Mass., 1905) gives a further discussion of the Revenge Plays, and especially of Marston. Bullen's edition of Marston is the standard. The editions of Heywood's Works (1874) and of Chapman's (1873-75) attempt no scholarly discussion. F. S. Boas's edition of the two Bussy D'Ambois plays in the _Belles-Lettres Series_ (Boston, 1905) has a valuable introduction. Gifford's edition of Jonson (1816) is unfortunately not yet superseded. The careful editions of various of his plays in the _Yale Studies in English_ as yet include none of his tragedies. _Ben Jonson, l'homme et l'oeuvre_ Paris, 1907, by Maurice Castelain is very elaborate, and contains a full bibliography with a preliminary descriptive note of editions. A new edition of Jonson edited by C. H. Herford and P. Simpson is announced.

FOOTNOTES:

[18] Mr. Elmer Stoll's argument against this early date does not seem to me convincing. See the Appendix to his _John Webster_, Cambridge, 1904.

[19] _Troilus and Cressida_ in some form was probably acted in 1602. The editors of the Folio apparently first intended to class it with the tragedies, but they changed their minds while the book was printing and placed _Troilus_ without pagination between the histories and tragedies. The preface to one of the quartos of 1609 classes it with the comedies, and the prologue inclines that way. For an interesting though not always convincing discussion of the many difficulties offered by the play, the reader is referred to Mr. R. A. Small's _The Stage Quarrel between Ben Jonson and The So-called Poetasters_ (1899), pp. 139-170. The play offers problems of importance in Shakespearean criticism, but in a history of tragedy it seems negligible. The concluding scenes (v, 7-10) are clearly not by Shakespeare, and the Prologue and v, 4-6 are doubtful.

[20] There is in fact a reference in Kempe's _Nine Days Wonder_ (1600) to the story, which may possibly indicate an earlier play.